You are here

Eleanor Nursing & Social Care Ltd - Poole Office Good


Inspection carried out on 29 June 2018

During a routine inspection

Eleanor Nursing & Social Care Ltd - Poole Office is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to adults living in their own houses and flats in Poole and Bournemouth. Not everyone using Eleanor Nursing & Social Care Ltd - Poole Office receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’, help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. Around 160 people were receiving personal care at the time we inspected.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection, we found the service remained good and met all fundamental standards.

People were protected from abuse, infection and avoidable harm. There were checks that staff were of good character and suitable for their role. Risks to people were assessed and managed, whilst their preferences were respected. Medicines were managed and administered safely. We have made a recommendation about auditing medicines.

Overall, there were sufficient trained and skilled staff to provide people’s care, although there had been pressures on staffing over the summer holiday period. This meant that for a while rotas were not sent out to let people know who would be coming to them and at what time. This was not the case when we concluded our inspection.

Things that went wrong were addressed in an open and transparent manner. There were reviews to ensure all necessary action had been taken following accidents and incidents, and analysis to identify any trends that could suggest further improvements were needed.

Staff mostly understood what people needed and had the skills and experience to provide this. Where people had support with preparing and consuming food and drink, they were satisfied with this and had food of their choice. Staff liaised with health and social care professionals where there were concerns about people’s health and people wanted the service to organise this for them. Staff were supported through regular training, supervision and appraisal.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were treated with kindness and compassion, and their privacy and dignity were respected. Staff had respect and affection for people and got to know them over time. People said their regular staff understood how they liked things to be done, but this was less often the case with unfamiliar staff. Where people had gender preferences in relation to staff, these were respected. People’s independence was promoted.

People were happy with their care, which was tailored to their individual needs. They were involved in decisions about their, or where appropriate their family member’s, care. Regular staff had a good understanding of people’s care plans, which were up to date. Assessments and care plans flagged up sensory loss or impaired communication and the way in which staff should support people with this; staff provided the support required.

Complaints were taken seriously and resolved promptly with the appropriate action taken. People and their families were given information about how to complain about their care.

The service had a positive, open, person-centred culture. There was open communication with staff. Staff were motivated to provide a good service. During the inspection the registered manager returned as planned from long-term leave. People and staff had confidence the registered manager would bring about imp

Inspection carried out on 1, 2 and 4 September 2015

During a routine inspection

The inspection visit took place on 1, 2 and 4 September. We told the provider one day before our visit that we would be coming. Eleanor Nursing and Social Care Ltd provides personal care services to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection 130 people were using the service.

There was no registered manager in place, however the manager had submitted an application prior to our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were safe. Staff had received regular training to make sure they stayed up to date with recognising and reporting concerns. The registered manager had systems in place to notify the appropriate authorities where concerns relating to suspected abuse were identified.

Where risks to people had been identified risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to reduce the risks. Staff were aware of people’s needs and followed guidance to keep them safe.

People were asked for their consent before care was provided. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 including the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

Staff were provided with relevant induction training to make sure they had the right skills and knowledge for their role. Staff understood their role and what was expected of them. They were happy in their work, motivated and had confidence in the way the service was managed.

People told us they could speak with staff if they had any worries or concerns and felt confident they would be listened to.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Regular checks and audits were undertaken to make sure full and safe procedures were adhered to.

People using the service and their relatives and others had been asked their opinion via surveys, the results of these were in the process of being audited to identify any areas for improvement.